dragoncon_lj_archive | Support the Dealer's Room

You're viewing

dragoncon_lj_archive
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

Freelancing is a tough road. Lots and lots of artists, merchants, designers, etc. actively try to make a living doing it. Travelling and working cons is WORK. The dealers rooms are places you can find things you just can't find anywhere else from some of the coolest people you would ever want to meet. Is it cheap? No. If you simply wanted to save a few bucks, go to Target.

In that same line, don't hamstring the dealers that PAID A LOT OF MONEY to have tables by side-stepping them and going to people that haven't paid the equivalent of Guild fees. It is just terrible Con Karma. If the dealers can't make ends meet, they don't come back. If they don't come back, how can you get that one-of-a-kind item? What would the con be like with a crappy dealer's room?

Is this a popular comment? No. Doing the right thing rarely matches doing the popular thing.

Thanks for listening...

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

zamiel.livejournal.com

You know, every year the art room gets more crowded and more overwhelmingly dense. The last thing I really want to deal with is a knot of folks right there at the side of the already narrow aisle. I'm almost willing to suggest that the reduced cost of your compeditor's entry is worth not having to walk all over them, from my perspective as a consumer.

From:

marrus.livejournal.com

...what appears to be under discussion are the ethics of selling out of a room when other vendors are paying to be there.

I've worked ren faires where we had nothing but rain all weekend. Patrons didn't show up, no one made any money, but the vendors ensured that the faire would last by supporting it with their booth fees.

Pehaps, given the demand for dealers who do body make-up, massage, henna, hair extensions, the Dragoncon powers that be might consider a separate "services" area?

From:

zamiel.livejournal.com

Well, the ethics of it are really moot, as I see it. I mean, its like debating the ethics of whether you must see a return on your advertising dollar, and if you don't, that the public has a responsibility to compensate you. That's prima facia ludicrous, and such is the suggestion that we, as the public consumers at D*C, are responsible for making sure the dealers who show turn a profit, no matter the state of competition. That's inane.

Perhaps the D*C convention chair might consider such, but given the generalized tightness of venue space as it is, it begs the question of where on Earth it'd go. Services vendors would want/demand to be near the dealer's room/exhibit halll, a place where there's not much space to put them. Unless you're suggesting they add a wing on to the Hyatt, which would make space somewhat cost-prohibitive.

And this sidesteps the issue of whether or not we, as consumers, have any ethical reason to prefer to spend more at a dealer's table than at a private individual's room. By that same argument, its unethical for you to offer a dealer's service from an art table, as unfair competition to the notional service renderer who might, possibly, have taken a dealer table.

Good attempt at a sidestep, though.

Ultimately, the argument you're putting forth is weak on logical bounds, and horribly broken on economic reasoning grounds.

(Now, if D*C has a rule in place which is signed by all badge owners which says you can't engage in commercial activity out of your room, its even less the responsibility of the civitas to eschew such services. Its D*C's rule; if they can't enforce it, its not my responsibility to. Moreover, if they have no such rule, there is likewise no incumbent responsibility on me to act counter to my best interests and throw more money at something than I have to.

Simple, really.)

From:

marrus.livejournal.com

If you own a bookshop, pay rent to the landlord and taxes to the state, spend a good chunk on advertising directing people to your location, someone can come along with a cart, set up in front of your shop, and proceed to sell books with impunity. Hey, it's a free market, right?

I never made the suggestion that the public consumers were responsible for ensuring the dealers turn a profit. What I did say is the money that the vendors pay to the festival ensures that many of its costs can be met - regardless of patronage.

Ultimately, the festivals I've attended all have had strict policies on unregulated vendors, and will happily revoke badges when they catch them, usually citing health & tax code violations.

From:

zamiel.livejournal.com

Actually, yes, they can, for the minimal cost of getting a business license. And if they have more of what the public wants, at a lower price, they can easily force you out of business.

It also suggests you're a pretty lousy merchant of books, if they can.

I think its safe to say that the dealer's room/exhibit hall table costs aren't paying the D*C costs. I suspect, at best, they're covering the floor space for the vast area the hotel's giving them. If there's less demand for the space, the space'll shrink, and cost's'll change. The rest of the Con won't blink.

The original poster's contention is (or was, since we have yet to see clarification) that the public should find it in their best interest to avoid buying things from non-dealer's/exhibit vendors in order to keep said vendors around. That's invalid at the most basic levels. The elaboration I've seen from other folks hasn't made it any more tenable.